Recently two different people have requested more information about my mastery-grading system, so I figured I should blog about it for efficiency's sake.

Below is my generic grading rubric. I usually use it for written assignments like reflections or unit test open-response items, but it's easily modifiable for posters, presentations, and other products. The wording of each general description has been carefully crafted to make them as objective as possible. Of course they still require judgment (more about that below), but every student submission can fit into each category. I don't introduce the whole thing at once to students, and I save the letter/number grades for last. Sometimes I assess different segments of a task separately. For a 2-part question that asks for information and analysis, you can score each part separately: "Fine" job with the information, but "Incomplete" analysis. For mastery, the student only needs to re-attempt the analysis portion. An earlier version had only four columns; I added the "Unclear" level for those in-between pieces that are "fine" in some ways, but not quite good enough to show solid understanding. Without it I wasted some time agonizing between the "B" and "D" levels for student work. After using this rubric for a full year, I see no need to add an additional level.

You can click the table below to open a GoogleDoc link.

Last year I made a GoogleForm exercise for students to practice applying the rubric themselves. Old Sturbridge Village is a living museum (like Colonial Williamsburg) where I have brought students for a field trip the past several years. After the trip, students had to reflect on their experience for their first formal writing piece of the year. For the practice task, I took screenshots of 4 written reflections from previous years, and assigned students to read and judge the pieces for themselves.Click the box below to access a copy of the GoogleForm that you can steal/borrow.

Here are the other 3 examples. You can try scoring them for yourself if you like![answers farther down the page]

This was a useful exercise and I strongly recommend doing something similar, even just with paper copies in the classroom instead of a digital survey. However, from the GoogleForm I got wonderful summary graphs of the responses for each example:

These graphs gave us much to discuss for a full class period, especially the divergence of opinion on Student Example #1. Actually, opinion is not the right word: this is not really a subjective exercise! The majority was wrong. The writer did not directly address part 2 of the task ("How did this field trip help you learn about life in Sturbridge Village?") so this piece cannot possibly earn an A or B. From the content of the last few sentences, we can infer that this student did learn some things about barrels and the specific work of a blacksmith. D seems overly harsh (okay, this task is slightly subjective!) so I would judge this as an Unclear C, because the writer "almost gets it" but needs to make clearer connections.

More briefly on the other examples:

​#2 is "Not Ready" and yes this was an actual submission. We could debate a little bit about whether the details about cows, flies, and small doorways show "Incomplete" understanding, but the utter lack of reference to part 2 is the clincher. At least he got to be with his friends!

​#3 is "Advanced" although of course it is not perfectly written. This helps students to understand the emphasis on content over style. The thoughtful connections put this paragraph over the top like the comparison between a general store and Target, and the contrast of workers and farmers.

#4 is "Fine" even though it is longer and more clearly organized into separate paragraphs. Clearly this student absorbed a lot, remembered tiny details, and got grossed out by the flies in the kitchen. We just don't see the deeper reflection that appears in #3.

Hmmmmmm...What else can or should I describe about this system? This is a pretty long post so I should wrap it up here.

Leave a Reply.

Who is this flipping guy?!

Andrew Swan just finished year 18 of teaching middle school (currently 8th-grade US History/Govt in a Boston suburb). Previously he has taught 6th, 7th, and 8th grade English, ancient history, & geography in Maine and in Massachusetts. This was Andrew's 5th year of flipping all direct instruction, so we have more class time for simulations, deep discussions, analyzing primary sources ... and also to promote mastery for students at all levels. His 8th-grade daughter, 10th-grade son, and wonderful wife all indulge Andrew's blogging, tweeting, & other behaviors. These include co-moderating the #sschat Twitter sessions and Facebook page. ​Andrew does not always refer to himself in the third-person. Twitter: @flipping_A_tchrInstagram: aswan802